http://www.af.mil/library/energy.asp

The US Air Force isn't the only branch that's getting energy-efficiency minded. But it's the only one I really hear a lot of press about.

 

The only evidence of fuel saving I see at my base are all the stupid little stickers put on the light switches telling you to turn the light off when leaving for the day. Someone in Civil Engineering got an award for that piece of brilliance.

You go to the barracks after checking in for a drill weekend and the air conditioning is on full blast in the room. Instead of having the room occupant turn on the unit, it is cranking all day....or all week probably.

A couple months ago I saw one of the most infuriating things - our former wing boss got promoted and they had a little shindig for him in the base hanger. They taxied a C-5 around the base. past the hanger and back around, just to stroke an ego.

If the Air Force were truly serious about saving energy (and money), they could start with some common sense items - things that don't cost a penny in research or retrofit.

JMO as a lowly NCO. What the hell do I know about energy conservation?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by nitramjr

If the Air Force were truly serious about saving energy (and money), they could start with some common sense items - things that don't cost a penny in research or retrofit.

JMO as a lowly NCO. What the hell do I know about energy conservation?

You don't need to wait for a directive to be conscious of energy conservation! It all starts at the lowest level...

Quote:

While the Air Force tries to improve its energy supply, it’s trying to decrease demand. Creating a culture in which airmen consider their energy consumption and try to conserve is one priority. --Laura M. Colarusso

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.airforcetimes.com/print.php?f=0-AIRPAPER-1982337.php

August 14, 2006

Service aims to slash jet-fuel use
Goal: Cut petroleum-based fuel consumption by 70%

By Laura M. Colarusso
Staff writer




The problem: Escalating fuel costs are threatening national security and soaking up funds the Air Force could use for other priorities.

The solution, officials say: Cut by 70 percent the service’s use of petroleum-based jet fuel by 2020.

The goal is just one part of the Air Force’s multipronged plan, which includes flying jets on natural gas, using renewable energy to power electrical systems on bases and investing in cars that run on ethanol.



As part of the push for fuel savings, the Air Force will spend about $2.1 billion over the next several years to build and upgrade training simulators, according to a June briefing from Michael Aimone, assistant deputy chief of staff for logistics, installations and mission support.

If the Air Force shifted 10 percent of combat and mobility training from flying to simulator sorties, that could save about 103 million gallons of jet fuel per year, Air Force officials estimate. The force consumes about 3 billion gallons of aviation fuel a year.

Air Force officials set the 70 percent reduction goal because reliance on foreign fuel supplies leaves the service vulnerable to shortages, they say.

Instability in the Middle East could lead to circumstances that block the military from getting the fuel it needs.

“The intent here is to certify an aviation fuel over the next three to five years,” Aimone said. “This is the first step.”

The Air Force, which has a fuel bill of more than $10 million per day, is only part of the Defense Department’s push for fuel savings. The Pentagon has launched multiple studies of military fuel and energy use. The Air Force has completed two studies and is conducting four more.

“We want to make sure we are utilizing our fuel and energy resources efficiently,” said Maj. Morshe Araujo, an Air Force spokeswoman.

The Pentagon accounts for 85 percent of the U.S. government’s fuel consumption, about 5 billion gallons a year. The Air Force’s 3 billion gallons a year represents a 6 percent increase over the past decade, according to Aimone.

In the past three years, the price per barrel of crude oil has more than doubled, climbing from $32 to $74, according to Ron Planting, an economist with the American Petroleum Institute, a trade association for American oil and natural gas companies.

“Right now, we’re importing about two-thirds of the oil we use,” Planting said. “The key thing is to think about how we can diversify the sources and use energy more efficiently.”

New ideas

The Air Force has begun experimenting with a fuel made from natural gas or coal.

In July, the Air Force completed ground tests of the fuels in a B-52 engine. Scientists examined the performance and pollution emissions of a blend of 50 percent JP-8 jet fuel and 50 percent natural gas-based fuel.

Flight testing is expected in mid- to late September at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., said William Harrison, chief of the fuels branch for turbine engines at the Air Force Research Laboratory.

The Air Force will use a B-52 from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., for the flight tests. The bomber won’t need adaptations to its engines or fuel system to accommodate the blended fuel, according to Edwards spokesman John Haire.

The aircraft will fly three typical B-52 missions.

“We see no show-stoppers,” Harrison said. “Things are still on track.”

The ground tests, which took place at Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., proved the service’s high expectations correct.

“The engine performed just as expected,” Harrison said. “We saw a reduction of pollution emissions.”

Paul Jalbert, an emission system engineer from the Arnold Engineering Development Center at Arnold Air Force Base, Tenn., said the service compared data from the 50-50 fuel blend to regular JP-8 jet fuel.

“We measured a pretty significant reduction in water content in the exhaust,” Jalbert said, referring to the blended fuel. “The other thing was, we measured less sulfur. The reduction in sulfur probably means less solid particulate [matter] like smoke in the exhaust.”

Flex-fuel vehicles

The Defense Department began researching the fuel, known as Fischer-Tropsch, or FT, in 2001. The Army, Navy and Energy Department are participating in the program.

Record-high crude oil prices and growing hostilities in the Middle East have boosted interest in Fischer-Tropsch.

FT fuels become cost-effective once a barrel of oil exceeds $50, said Jon Werzel, a chemical engineer with Syntroleum, the company that is supplying the FT fuels the Air Force is testing. In June, the Air Force awarded Syntroleum a contract for 100,000 gallons of the FT jet fuel.

The service also owns about 3,000 flex-fuel vehicles that have a single tank, fuel system and engine but can run on either petroleum-based fuels or E-85 ethanol, a corn derivative. Air Force officials have also begun investing in low-speed vehicles, which have a top speed of about 30 miles per hour. These street-legal vehicles get better gas mileage, Aimone said.

For the past five years, the Air Force has looked to derive cleaner energy from sources such as wind power, a move that has garnered the service praise from the Environmental Protection Agency.

On May 17, the EPA named the Air Force a 2006 Climate Protection Award Winner for its efforts. The Air Force has also been named a Green Power Partner of the Year for 2005 from the Green Power Partnership, a voluntary alliance among the EPA and companies interested in buying renewable energy. According to EPA records, the Air Force bought more renewable energy than any other partner.

That purchase of renewable energy accounted for 47 percent of the federal government’s green power use.

Service officials also have pursued biomass plants and solar panels that either reduce or don’t emit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, which are believed to cause global warming.

While the Air Force tries to improve its energy supply, it’s trying to decrease demand.

Creating a culture in which airmen consider their energy consumption and try to conserve is one priority.

Defense News writer Gopal Ratnam contributed to this report.

 

Unfortunately it also ends there....